|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List') | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Hey Buz,
I tried to explain to you before how you misunderstand what evidence is and how to use it, but it didn't sink in. I don't care about any of the stuff you're calling the reasons that people are against you. You're just plain ol' wrong about what consititutes evidence and how it is supposed to be used. I'm just gonna repost what I said before, let me know what you're not getting:
quote: quote: quote: Do you think that rain dancer would have corrobotive evidence that his Rain Dance works if it rains after he does the dance?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Moose, your moderation is getting increasingly erratic. This is becoming a serious problem for this forum, and for me. If it wasn't for the extremely superior software, I would have abandoned this board long ago simply because moose is such a jerk.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
I have already acknowledged my own rage. That is why I am able to clearly see that same rage in many of your self righteous, pompous asses. But seriously, you're getting pissed off in real life because of an internet forum!?
This is the internets, man:
Perhaps you need some assistance:
None of this shit matters, dude. Calm down.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
People, I'm seeing a fair number of messages that pile up a bunch of (+) ratings. Would someone please start plugging some of these into the POTM topics. - Adminnemooseus That ain't gonna work. If you weren't such a dick people might take your advice. Just sayin'
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Oh darn, I should have created that announcement anonymously. Now people aren't going to post to the POTM topics because I suggested it. Might as well shut the POTM forum down. No, that's dumb. People are still gonna post POTM's, its just not gonna be because of your announcement. You can't be mean to a group of people and then turn around and ask them to do something. That don't work.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
It seems to me that I am clearly following this policy, and I cannot see your objection. He's set up a conditional and you're countering that condition. Just assume its true for the sake of argument. If you can't, then just don't participate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
no, i don't think this is a particularly great way to run a debate board. imagine, for a second, we had a thread that questioned, "creationists, why do you believe in a religion that tells you to eat puppies?" and then moderated all posts by creationists who argued that this is not what their religion says, because they were countering the conditional set in the OP? yeah, it'd be pretty silly. exposing a flawed assumption is always a valid counterargument. No, I feel you, but this was set-up as a special case. And a better analogy would be: "Creationists, if your religion tells you to eat puppies, then is ketchup better than mustard?" Or whatever, so long as its a conditional If-then. If you don't think your religions tells you to eat puppies, then the question doesn't apply to you. In general you're right, but the mods specifically set this one so that it wouldn't get bogged down into that discusion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
so the question was aimed at people who think the bible does not contain the 100% inerrant truth. paulk qualifies. the question was what value it would have. paulk answered, from his position. it looks quite relevant to me. Like I said, he was countering the condition of the If-Then. And I think that's exactly what was intended to be avoided. You know, for the sake of discussion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
How is it that Admin (you know the impartial referee guy, who also devises strategies to convince all the fence sitters lurking here) has allowed the the Origin of Novelty discussion (in which evolutionists seem incapable of describing any coherent theory from the onset) to spiral completely off topic for page after page after page? Maybe he was busy doing something in real life rather than sitting around monitoring his forum all day?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Coyote writes:
From Faith's point of view, we're the Jehovah's Witnesses and she's doing us a big favour by just coming to the door, never mind listening to what we have to say. But Faith needs to meet us somewhere close to halfway. You didn't analogize the part where she gets a free science education that she then spins back at us to suit her own purposes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
But if Faith did that we wouldn't be talking about her. Right, its no surprise that she get's the responses that she does when she behaves the way she does.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
Right, its no surprise that she get's the responses that she does when she behaves the way she does. It doesn't surprise me that Faith sometimes gets cranky. I'm not talking about her behaving crankily. I'm talking about her drawing a lot of time and effort from others, who offer her detailed explanations of complicated scientific principles, only for her to turn it back around on them as some sort of support for her pre-conceived religious beliefs. She's using people. People don't like being used. I understand why they get tired of her shit.
Imagine yourself (as in any of the evo side) being in a debate in a creationist dominated forum, and you are the one against the many. Even if "the many" go about it nicely (and here, the evo side sometimes does come up short on that), there is a substantial pressure on you, and you'd be liable to get cranky. Been there, done that. Against both creationists and evolutionists. Hell, look at the gun control thread. I can't ask a question without being accused of denial. And the best is arguing with Catholics on their forums only to have them end the argument with: "You can't be a Catholic, then." Sure, its annoying. But we're on the internet. If you can't maintain a level head, then you need to get offline.
One side of the argument being cranky doesn't justify the other side getting cranky. I don't care who started it, you should be nice to your opponent. If you can't be such, maybe you shouldn't be posting that reply. Its not her crankiness that draws crankiness, its the horrible way she treats people, i.e. using them for her own purposes. So no, people aren't "picking" on her. She's being a bitch and getting the responses we should expect.
On a side note, one thing I could try doing, is a hard core enforcement of the forum rules. We know.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Yeah, she treats people badly but because she's the only true creationist left then she gets special treatment from the moderators so she doesn't go away.
Well fuck her. Treat her like she should be treated, just like everyone else, and if she plays the martyr card and goes away then so be it.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024